An Interview with Nick Holloway

Our series of unexpurgated interviews with Linux kernel pioneers continues with this e-conversation with Nick Holloway.

Welcome to the unexpurgated version of
Linux Journal's Linux Kernel Who's Who. If you
haven't yet seen our June 2000 issue, which features 40 profiles of
some of the kernel's pioneers (hackers like Lars Wirzenius, Pauline
Middlelink and, of course, Linus Torvalds), make sure you get a
copy from your nearest newsstand or your nearest Linux Journal web
site. If you have already read the profiles, then our unexpurgated
versions of the original interviews, which were e-mailed to each
major contributor to the Linux kernel, may reveal a few surprises,
and a lot more detail.

We'll be posting the original interviews here on the
Linux Journal web site over the next several
weeks. So sit back and enjoy a few words from some of the folks who
helped make Linux possible!

--David Penn

An Interview with Nick Holloway

Linux Journal: How
did you first learn about Linux? What were you doing in your own
life at the time?

Nick Holloway: I was a Ph.D
student at the University of Warwick, and I heard about Linux
through Usenet around the time of its inception. I immediately
subscribed to alt.os.linux so I could read more. In early 1993, I
bought a machine specifically for running Linux.

LJ: What attracted
you to it, compared to FreeBSD, proprietary UNIX systems, or
lucrative areas such as Windows? What made you want to help with
development?

Nick: I had used UNIX (BSD
and SunOS) almost exclusively since starting at the University of
Warwick in 1985, and was hooked. I wanted a home computer, but I
also wanted to be able to run UNIX. It had looked as if my best bet
was the BSD port, 386/BSD. However, this was overshadowed by the
lawsuit against BSDI.

When Linux became available, it was the obvious choice to me.
It had enough to get started and be usable, but there was plenty of
scope for being able to contribute to its development.

LJ: What part of
Linux were you personally interested in and working on? How are you
still involved with Linux development?

Nick: I was interested in
the areas that I needed to work for me. I contributed patches to
libc4 when I found problems that affected me. I contributed tab
expansion for the tty layer in the kernel when I wanted to use a
dumb terminal that couldn't handle hardware tabs.

I added the dummy network driver to ease the use of Linux
with a dialup connection.

Normally, my involvement is restricted to tracking the Linux
kernel mailing list and browsing the patches. I'll submit minor
patches from time to time, but I am not a mainstream
contributor.

LJ: What was most
important to you about Linux? What's the very best thing about
Linux?

Nick: I like the model of
being able to modify the source to fix a problem or add an
enhancement you need. You can then submit it back, and if it is
seen as generally good, it gets included.

LJ: How important
was the GNU project, and how did the GNU Hurd factor into your
thinking? Should Linux be known as GNU/Linux?

Nick: To me, GNU Hurd is an
interesting project, but it never appeared to be the way of
achieving my ambition of a home UNIX machine. The GNU project was
very useful in getting a broad suite of user applications, without
which the kernel is not of much use. Most important of these has to
be the compiler, gcc. However, while the GNU project should be
acknowledged for its part in assisting Linux, I don't agree with
having the title "GNU/Linux" applied to all Linux distributions
using GNU software.

LJ: What was it
like to be working with others over the Internet at a time when
several computer luminaries thought that organizing successful
software development over the Internet was difficult if not
impossible? Did you realize how revolutionary this approach
was?

Nick: To me, it wasn't that
revolutionary at the start. I have seen it in action with the
various source newsgroups (alt.sources, comp.sources.unix,
comp.sources.misc), where I could make changes, submit them back to
the author and see them in the next release. Initially, Linux
wasn't that different; it was an OS kernel, rather than an
application. It just grew to be a much larger scale.

Over time, it has become more amazing. As the size grew and
the number of contributors increased, it has been amazing to see
the same success. It has been good to see Eric Raymond's writings
helping to clarify exactly what the phenomenon is.

LJ: What are you
doing with your life now? What's a typical day like in your life?
How do you find time for work and Linux, and how do you balance
free software with the need to make a living (or the desire to
become rich)? What do you do for fun?

Nick: My job involves the
development of business-to-business e-commerce solutions. This is
mainly using NT, or Solaris, but not Linux. This isn't bad, because
it allows me to separate work and play in a clean way.

I have to try and spend some time away from the computer, as
my wife is not into computing. Pam is very understanding, and
understands that playing with computers is a hobby. Away from the
computers, we go scuba-diving, hill walking, cycling, and are avid
readers.

LJ: Who do you
think other than Linus has had the most influence over the Linux
community, and why?

Nick: Alan Cox has been the
person I have noticed most. He has been involved with major input
to various parts of the kernel (networking, SMP, sound). More
importantly, in my opinion, he has performed the very valuable job
of maintaining the stable branch of the kernel. Although the
development branch is where the kernel action is, many people just
want a stable kernel for their production machines.

LJ: How do you
feel about Linux's current popularity? Would you have preferred it
stayed contained in the hacker community? Would it have survived on
the fringes?

Nick: I think without the
popularity, the pace of development would have dwindled by now. I
would probably have continued using it, but I think it would have
remained a hacker's plaything and dwindled over time.

LJ: Would it have
survived without the IPOs and financial backing? What impact has
the commercialization of Linux had? How do you feel about Linux
profiteering and the people who make millions off of other people's
volunteered efforts?

Nick: I wish anyone well
with their efforts to profit from Linux. Overall, the companies are
creating a net benefit to the Linux community. For example, Red Hat
and SuSE are each in the position to employ important hackers,
which means they don't suffer from real work getting in the way of
their Linux work. This is one of the hazards of free software
development.

LJ: How do you
feel about commercial applications being written for Linux, and
proprietary software and protocols in general? Do you run Linux
more for philosophical reasons or practical reasons? If something
that appeared to be better came along, would people jump ship?
Conversely, would we stay with Linux even if it somehow
degenerated, took a wrong turn, or stopped
progressing?

Nick: I think there is a
place for commercial applications being written for Linux. Just
because the OS and many of the standard applications are free
doesn't mean they all have to be. If a company has to invest in
producing an application for Linux, then they have the right to
charge for it.

On the other hand, I don't like proprietary protocols. I
think the success of the Internet is largely due to heterogeneous
machines sharing common protocols. Having open protocols gives you
the opportunity to inter-operate.

LJ: How do you
feel about the different licenses? GPL, LGPL, QPL,
etc.?

Nick: I recognize that there
will never be an open-source solution for every application, so you
will never have everything available under the GPL. Without the
libc being LGPL, there would never be the range of business
applications available for Linux that there currently is.

LJ: Is there a
world outside of computers? Are you ever afraid that you'll wake up
one day and feel you have wasted your life in front of a
computer?

Nick: I don't expect to
think I've wasted my life. Even if I unplug myself tomorrow, to
pursue my career as a hermit, I've still enjoyed the experience so
far.

Trending Topics

Upcoming Webinar

Getting Started with DevOps - Including New Data on IT Performance from Puppet Labs 2015 State of DevOps Report

August 27, 2015
12:00 PM CDT

DevOps represents a profound change from the way most IT departments have traditionally worked: from siloed teams and high-anxiety releases to everyone collaborating on uneventful and more frequent releases of higher-quality code. It doesn't matter how large or small an organization is, or even whether it's historically slow moving or risk averse — there are ways to adopt DevOps sanely, and get measurable results in just weeks.